1st International Conference on Education

Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training

UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi
Proceeding, Vol 1, Tahun 2022

The Effectiveness of YouTube Videoa on Students’ Speaking

Achievement of The Elevent Grade of SMAN 1 Sarolangun

Apriani1, Shynta Amalia2, * and Juliana Mesalina3

1
UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi
2
UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi
3
UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi

*Coresponding author : apriani17.a@gmail.com

Abstract. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of the use of YouTube videos on
speaking skills in 11th grade high school students at SMAN 1 Sarolangun. The researcher applied a quasi-
experimental quantitative method with a Noneequivalent (Pre-test and Post-test) control-group design.
Researchers took two Class XI MIPA 1 as an experimental class that was taught using YouTube Video, and
XI MIPA 2 as a control class that was not taught using YouTube videos. The data were taken using an
instrument in the form of a speaking test given at the beginning and at the end of the study. In analyzing the
data, the researcher applied a paired sample t-test to determine the effectiveness of YouTube and to find out
whether there was a difference between student achievement before and after, the researcher analyzed using
an independent sample t-test. There is a difference between students who are taught using You-Tube media
and students who are invited to use ordinary media (books) by the conclusion that You-Tube media can
improve students' speaking ability and there is a significant difference between students who use You-Tube
media and those who don't.

Keywords: You-Tube, Speaking achievement , 11th grade

INTRODUCTION

English as an international language play a more important role in many parts of our life nowadays.
Master English, especially speaking skill, is importantly need for the students to allow them to communicate
with other people global. According to (Brumfit, 2001) said that “ English as an international language that
it is the most widespread medium of international communication”.

Speaking is one of the skills that must be mastered. in the era of the industrial revolution 4.0 like today,
it cannot be denied that English is very important for us to learn and master. Why? The main reason is
because in addition to being an international language, English makes it easier for you to adapt to the global
world, such as in the environment of education, work, even as a gateway to increase your mastery of science
and technology. However, a lot of students still have some problem in speaking. (Riswandi, 2016) based on
his research, he found some difficulties in mastering speaking skills by eleventh-grade students at one of
Page 68
Junior High Schools in Surakarta. He discovered that the students are unmotivated and uninterested in
learning. When answering questions from their teacher or having performance in front of the class they feel
shy, anxious, and unconfident. In addition, (Kurniawan 2016) discovered that the majority of SMP T
Bustanul Arifin Bener Meriah junior high school students were unable to communicate in English well, even
in simple sentences. He went on to claim that this phenomenon is triggered by a variety of factors, including
grammatical and vocabulary issues.

According to some real-life evidence, it appears that there is a phenomenon of speaking, especially in
student areas. The majority of students have trouble learning to speak English. Because of a variety of
reasons, the majority of them are unable to communicate effectively in English. Based on interviews with
teachers(via online) at SMAN 1 Sarolangun, the teacher said 60% of students had difficulties expressing
what they wanted to say when performing in front of the class. The most of students memorize what they
will say when they are performance in front of the class. it was difficult for students in the eleventh grade to
speak English.. Students had difficulty in learning English, especially speaking skill. They had boring
activities in English class. They also lack self-confidence and motivation. Generally , students in the class
have low learning motivation and interest. They feel shy, nervous, and luck confidence when answer
question from their teacher or have a performance in front of the class. The teacher used textbook-based
technique, lack of attractive learning media, and read aloud from book when teaching English. Another
problem that appear in speaking was term of pronunciation and vocabulary.

Students need something to make them interested in learning English. To increase student interest in
learning, teachers need to upgrade learning media. Briggs in Aniqotunnisa (2013) stated that teaching media
is all physical form that can convey message and can stimulate students to learn. One of the learning media
that teachers can use is YouTube videos. while Mayer (2001) also claimed that multimedia in the
teaching/learning process refers to the cognitive effect or mental images that a person forms as a result of
being exposed to a multimedia display

YouTube video has become the most popular social platform for earthing to absorb information. Based
on data from ComScore VMX shows that there are more 93 million viewers in Indonesia (over 18 years old)
who watched videos on YouTube video every month for the past year. in other words, 91% of Indonesians
visit YouTube at least once a month. Using video in speaking helps them to learn correct pronunciation and
develop their vocabulary. That is why YouTube video is a platform that can increase the motivation and
interest of students in learning. Technology plays a vital role in societies and it can be use for many aspect of
daily life . For instance, many people use technology to conduct activities and work like searching for a job,
complementing business transaction, gathering information, and be used effectively for various aspect in
education. One of the platforms that is widely used by the community is YouTube video .

The education institution is required to be creative and innovative in creating new and interesting media
for students. YouTube is a popular social media platform that hosts thousands of entertaining, educational,

Page 69
political, medical, and historical videos from all over the world (Bonk, 2009). Video gives an authentic
material with the right pronunciation and vocabulary for students to practice. Video show the right situation
of they conversation and the right body language of the speaker to the audience. by using YouTube video,
students can understand material faster than studying thought textbook, because usually learning media is
made interesting, so student will not feel bored. This is allegedly able to increase students interest and
motivation. That is why the researcher chose YouTube video as an alternative way to help students to
improve their speaking skill. This research aims at finding out all the effectiveness and advantages and
show how YouTube can be used by teachers.

Based on the problems identification and limitation above the problem formulation is formulated as
follow. (1). Is there any significant difference on students’ speaking achievement before and after being
taught by using YouTube video? (2) Is there any significant difference on speaking achievement between the
students of those who are taught by using YouTube video and those who are not?

To answer research formulation above, the research objective is: (1). To find out whether or not there is a
significant difference on students’ speaking performance before and after being taught by using YouTube
video. (2). To find out whether or not there is significant difference on speaking performance between the
students of those who are taught by using YouTube video and those who are not.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The Concept of Speaking

Speaking is a part of life. Speaking, according to (Lado, 1961), is the ability to express oneself in daily
situations, record acts, use specific phrases, or fluently express a set of ideas. Speaking skill is the skill that
give us the ability to communicate effectively. This allow the speaker, to convey his massage in a passionate,
thoughtful, and convincing manner. Furthermore, speaking refers to students creating pieces of language and
watching how that information is fed back into the acquisition process, according to (Harmer, 2007).

Important to take into recognize the various functions of speaking when planning speaking practices.
Each speech activity serves a distinct function. There are three functions of speaking, according to Brown
and Yule in (Richard, 2008): talks as transaction, talks as interaction, and talks performance.

Teaching Media
In general, teaching media refers to any media that a teacher may use to provide teaching material to
students during the teaching learning process in order to achieve specific learning objectives. According to
(Arsyad, 2009), a teaching media is one that offers instructional messages or learning content. Message and
information are conveyed by media.

Page 70
Using Video as Teaching Media
Audio visual media (video) is one type of learning media that can be used in the learning process.
(Asyhar, 2011) defines that audio-visual media is a type of media used in learning activities involved hearing
and sight as well as in one process or activity. The messages and information that can be transmitted through
this medium can be in the form of verbal and nonverbal messages that rely on both sight and hearing. Some
examples of audio visual media are films, videos, TV programs and others.

The Use of YouTube Video in Teaching Speaking

Speaking Teaching by using video has been used since years ago. It is believed that video gives
potential impact on foreign language study. It is beneficial to present both linguistic and non-linguistic
aspects. A video is a resourceful tool for teaching foreign language speaking. (Harmer, 2007) states that a
video can provide language in use. For example, the students can see how intonation matches facial
expression and what gestures accompany certain phrases.

Hypothesis

Ha1: There is a significant difference on students’ speaking achievement before and after being taught by
using YouTube video
Ha2: There is significant difference on speaking achievement between the students of those who are taught
by using YouTube video and those who are not
H01: There is no significant difference on students’ speaking achievement before and after being taught by
using YouTube video
H02: There is no significant difference on speaking achievement between the students of those who are
taught by using YouTube video and those who are not

METHOD
The research was implemented in SMA N 1 Sarolangun, located at Jl Tambir, Kel. Aurgading, Kec.
Sarolangun, Kab. Sarolangun. The data were collected about five weeks including the pre-test and the post-
test. The video were used in part of three meetings to the experimental group. This study falls into the
category of quasi-experimental quantitative method with a Noneequivalent (Pre-test and Post-test) control-
group design. The pre-test and post-test configuration was used in the study. It was a pre-test – post-
test intact group design with a group of students in the experimental group and a group of students
in the control group.

Video was used to give the experimental group a special treatment. The control group was
given the conventional process without video, which is textbook-based, as is normally done by the
teacher. The independent variable and the dependent variable were also included in the research.
The independent variable was the treatment, which was split into two levels: video treatment in the

Page 71
experimental group and the control group without video treatment . Meanwhile, the students'
speaking performance was the dependent variable.
Table 3.1 The Experiment Design
Group Pre-Test Treatment Post –Test
Experimental 01 X 02
Control 03 0 04

The participants in this study were students of eleventh grade at SMA N 1 Sarolangun. There are six
classess with a total of 168 students are available at the school. They are XI 1, XI 2, XI 3, XI 4, in the
academic year 20200/2021. Each class has a different number of students in it. It was impossible to use all
the population as the sample due to some considerations. The research sample was selected by the purposive
sampling technique. Researchers select certain elements from the population that are representative or
informative about the topic (McMillan and Schumacher, 2014). The researcher used purposive sampling to
determine which class are the experimental group and the control group. On the basis of the researchers'
knowledge of the population, the researchers classified based on the teachers who taught and the average
achievement in these two classes was the same. Because of COVID-19 each class at SMAN 1 Sarolangun is
divided into two shift, they were XI MIPA 1 shift A and XI MIPA 2 shift A. After the sampling selection,
XI MIPA 1 was selected as the experimental class and XI MIPA 2 as the control class.

Table 1 Table 3.3 The Research Sample by Class

Class The Number of Students
XI MIPA 1 SHIFT A 17
XI MIPA 2 SHIFT A 17
Total 34

In this study there are two variables namely independent variable (x) and dependent variable (y). In
this research, the independent variable is YouTube video (x). Students speaking achievement is the study's
dependent variable (y). The researcher used test as a data collection technique in this study. The data were
collected for about five weeks (including pre-test and post-test). Role play is the test. The test was divided
into two parts. The pre-test was given before treatment, and was given after treatment. In this research the
instrument used by researcher is test to collecting the data. The test is speaking test in the form of role play.
The test was carried out orally in front of the class. . However, before the researcher gave the students a pre-
test and a post-test, the researcher had them try out the instruments to check if they were valid and whether
the students could understand the instrument better. the material used is taken based on the curriculum used
by the school (K13). The assessment is taken using the scoring rubric which is adopted from Blazz (2001)

Page 72
Technique for Analyzing Data
1. Descriptive Analysis

The aim of the descriptive analysis was to provide answers to the questions of the effect of using videos
to develop students' speaking skills is a research question.

2. Statistical Analysis
a. Normality Test
b. Homogeneity Test
c. T-test

Validity and Reliability

1. Validity
a. Validity Test Instruments
b. Content Validity

Statistical Hypothesis
Ha1: P>0.05 Means that There is a significant difference on students' speaking achievement before and
after being taught by YouTube at SMA N 1 sarolangun

Ha2: P>0.05 Means that There is a significant Improvement between the students‟ taught by using
YouTube video and those who were not.

H01: P<0.05 Means that There is no significant difference on the students speaking achievement before
and after being taught by YouTube video.at SMAN 1 Sarolangun

H02: P<0.05 Means that There is no significant improvement between the students' taught by using
YouTube video and those who were not.

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION

Descriptive analysis
The researcher describes the frequencies, percentages, and mean scores of the tests in this section,
based on the test findings before and after the intervention in both the experimental and control groups. The
researcher describe the criterion for speaking score based on the criterion, score 91-100 are excellent, 81-90
are very good, 71-80 ae good, 61-70 are average, 61-70 are fair, 51-60 are poor, less than 40 are inadequate.

1. Descriptive Analysis
a. The Result of Experimental Group Students’ Speaking Competence in Pretest and Post test

Page 73
 Table 4.2
Frequency table of pre-test score in experimental class
Pre-Test Experimental
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Inadequate 3 17.6 17.6 17.6
Poor 7 41.2 41.2 58.8
Fair 3 17.6 17.6 76.5
Average 2 11.8 11.8 88.2
Good 2 11.8 11.8 100.0
Total 17 100.0 100.0

Figure 4.1
Figure pre-test experimental

Pre-Test Experiment

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Inadequate Poor Fair Average Good

As can be seen from the Table 4.2 and figure 4.1, showed that 3 students (17%) are categorized
Inadequate. 7 students (41%) are categorized Poor. 3 students (18%) are categorized fair. 2 students (12%)
are categorized average. 2 students (12%) are categorized good. No students obtained score more than 80 as
categorized very good/excellent. In summary, the results of pre-test in experimental class were lower because
the mean score was 50, it was categorized poor.

Table 4.3
Frequency table of post-test score in experimental class
Post-Test Experimental
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Average 2 11.8 11.8 11.8
Good 4 23.5 23.5 35.3
very good 7 41.2 41.2 76.5
Excellent 4 23.5 23.5 100.0
Total 17 100.0 100.0
Figure 4.2
Page 74
 Figure post-test experimental

Post-Test Experiment

50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Average Good Very good Excellent

After accepting treatment (using YouTube video), the students showed good improvement in this
class. As can be seen from the Table 4.3 and further explained by Figure 4.2. 2 students (41%) are
categorized average. 4 students (23%) are categorized good. 7 students (41%) are categorized very good. 4
students (23%) are categorized excellent. No students obtained categorized fair/poor. In summary, the results
of post-test in experimental class were higher than pre-test because the mean score was 65 and it was
categorized average.
b. The Result of Control Group Students’ Speaking Competence in Pretest and Post test
Table 4.4
Frequency table of pre-test score in control class
Pre-Test Control
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Inadequate 4 23.5 23.5 23.5
Poor 5 29.4 29.4 52.9
Fair 2 11.8 11.8 64.7
Average 4 23.5 23.5 88.2
Good 2 11.8 11.8 100.0
Total 17 100.0 100.0
Figure 4.3
Figure pre-test control

Pre-Test Control

35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Inadequate Poor Fair Average Good

Page 75
As can be seen from the Table 4.3 and further explained by Figure 4.2. In summary, the results of pre-test in
control class were lower because the mean score was 52, it was categorized fair. While, 4 students (14.3%)
are categorized Inadequate. 5 students (29.4%) are categorized Poor. 2 students (11.8%) are categorized fair.
4 students (23.5%) are categorized average, and 2 students (11.8%) are categorized good.

Table 4.5
Frequency table of post-test score in control class
Post-Test Control

Frequenc Valid Cumulative

y Percent Percent Percent
Valid Poor 1 5.9 5.9 5.9
Average 5 29.4 29.4 35.3
Good 8 47.1 47.1 82.4
very 3 17.6 17.6 100.0
good
Total 17 100.0 100.0

Figure 4.4
Figure post-test control

Post-Test Control

50,00%

40,00%

30,00%

20,00%

10,00%

0,00%
Poor Average Good Verry Good

This class with no treatment (no using YouTube video) and result can be seen from Table 4.5 and
further explained by Figure 4.4 In summary, the results of post-test in control class were higher than pre-test
because the mean score was 71, it was categorized good. While, 1 student (5.9%) are categorized poor. 5
student (29.4%) is categorized average. 8 students (47.1%) are categorized good. 3 student (17.6%) Is
categorized very good.

After scoring the frequency and percentage of score from pre-test and post-test, the researcher next
calculate the standard deviation, the minimum and the maximum of the speaking pre-test and the post-test
scores of sample were 17 students and calculated respectively by using IBM SPPS 25. Table 4.6 below
represented the result.

Page 76
 Table 4.6
Descriptive statistics
Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
PRE-TEST 17 25 70 50.88 14.168
EXPERIMENTAL
POST-TEST 17 65 100 85.88 10.191
EXPERIMENTAL
PRE-TEST CONTROL 17 25 70 52.94 13.585
POST-TEST CONTROL 17 50 85 71.18 9.606
Valid N (listwise) 17

Prerequisite-Test
2. Normality
The normality test was used to determine whether or not the sample had a normal
distribution. The Kolmogorov-smirnov test in SPSS 25 is used to check for normality. The data
is distributed normally if the significance result was greater than 0.05. However, if the
significance level is less than 0,05, the data is not normally distributed
Table 4.7 Normality Test with Kolmogorov-Smirnov

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Unstandardized
Residual
N 15
Normal Parametersa,b Mean .0000000
Std. Deviation 1.46241681
Most Extreme Differences Absolute .151
Positive .151
Negative -.149
Test Statistic .151
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .200c,d
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
c. Lilliefors Significance Correction.
d. This is a lower bound of the true significance.

according to the table above, the significance of Asiymp.Sig (2-tailed) is 0,200 > 0,05, . As a
result, the kolmograf-smirnov test revealed that the data has a normal distribution.

3. Homogeneity
The homogeneity test was used to determine whether or not the data were homogeneous.
The researcher utilized SPSS 25 to determine the homogeneity of the data. If the result of
homogeneity test was higher than criteria of test 0,05, the data were homogeneous.

Page 77
 Table 4.8
Normality test of variance
Test of Homogeneity of Variances
Levene
Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
Score Based on Mean .350 1 28 .559
Based on Median .217 1 28 .645
Based on Median and .217 1 25.636 .646
with adjusted df
Based on trimmed mean .349 1 28 .559

The sig/p value from each data was higher than 0,05, as shown in the table above. It denotes
that the information is homogeneous. Because the data is proven to be normal and the variance
is distributed, the researcher uses parametric statistics, the researcher applies paired sample t-
test analysis to answer question number 1 and independent t-test for question number 2Paired
sample t-test

Statistic Analysis
a. Paired sample t-test
To compare the two matched related groups, a paired sample t-test was used. The sample
used in this test was same. Both samples, however, received different treatment. The researcher
utilized SPSS 25 to calculate the data for this research.
Table 4.9 Paired samples test

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Std. Std. Interval of the Sig.
Deviati Error Difference (2-
Mean on Mean Lower Upper T df tailed)
Pair Pre-Test of - 4.7169 1.1440 - - -8.741 16 .000
1 Experimental -Post- 10.000 9 4 12.42525 7.5747
Test of Experimental 00 5
Based on the Table 4.9 The Output of Paired Sample t-test, showed that the results of the
compare analysis with using t-test. The output showed of mean of pre-test (10.000), standard
deviation (4.716), mean standard error (1.144), the lower different (12.425), while the upper
different (75.747). The result of t test (8.741) with df = 16 and significance (0.000). It means as
Table 4.10 showed, the p-value was less than 0.05 (0.000<0.05). It denotes that the outcome was
significant. As a result, there was sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis, and it was
found that the You-Tube Videos was beneficial in improving students' speakin achievement.
b. .Independent Sample T-Test

Page 78
 Independent sample t-test was used to compare the means of two unrelated groups to
examine if there was statistical evidence that associated population means were significantly
different. The researcher used SPSS v.25 to perform the independent sample t-test

Table 4.10
Independent Samples Test
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Std. 95% Confidence
Sig. Mean Error Interval of the
(2- Differe Differe Difference
F Sig. T Df tailed) nce nce Lower Upper
Speaking Skill Equal 3.619 .066 - 32 .000 - 1.14706 - -7.66352
variances 8.718 10.000 12.3364
assumed 0 8
Equal - 28.1 .000 - 1.14706 - -7.65099
variances 8.718 68 10.000 12.3490
not assumed 0 1

The output of the independent sample t test showed that sig (2-tailed) is 0,000 and was smaller than
0,05, as shown in the table above. It can be concluded from this data that there is a significant difference
between students who are taught using YouTube and those who are not.

Interpretation
According to the previous analysis, the result showed that utilizing YouTube media can increase
speaking achievement, and there is a substantial difference between students who are taught using YouTube
media and those who are not. Based on the analysis obtained from the students’ post-test control the mean
score is 71,18. While the mean score of the students’ post-test experiment class is 85,88. It indicates that
after giving treatment by You-Tube media the students have better achievement. Based on the post test
scores in the control and experimental classes, it can be seen that there are differences in the scores in the
two classes. the value in the experimental class is higher than the control class, this is due to several reasons
such as, in the experiment class the researcher uses YouTube video as a learning media to make it more
interactive.

According to (Heinich, et al, 2013), the medium serves as a mediator between the sender and the receiver
of information. Teaching media is defined as any medium that transmits instructional messages or
information for the purpose of learning.Audio visual media (video) is one type of learning media that can be
used in the learning process. (Asyhar, 2011) defines that audio-visual media is a type of media used in
learning activities involved hearing and sight as well as in one process or activity. The messages and
information that can be transmitted through this medium can be in the form of verbal and nonverbal
messages that rely on both sight and hearing. meanwhile in the control class the researcher did not use

Page 79
interactive media such as YouTube. so that there is no increase in motivation, students' interest in learning
becomes low and causes less increase in student scores

The result showed that using You-Tube can improve students’ speaking skill and there is significant
difference between the students taught by using You-Tube media and those who taught by conventional
study. According Yunita (2015) states that You-Tube is one of media that can improve students’ speaking
skill. this statement support with Hamer, according to Hamer (2003, p.290) video can make their
performance are grow, because the students’ will be more active. This fact can be seen from the result of pre-
test and post-test in both groups. The means score of pre-test in experimental class was 50,88. with minimum
score was 25 and maximum score was 70. The mean score of post-test in experimental class was 85,88. with
minimum score was 65 and maximum score was 100. Meanwhile, the mean score of pre-test of control group
was 52,94. with minimum score was 25 and maximum score was 70. the mean score of post-test in control
class was 71,18. with minimum score was 50 and maximum score was 85.

From the data explained before, it can be seen that students’ score in experimental class is higher than
students in control class. It means that using You-Tube media can improve students’ speaking skill and there
is significant difference between students who taught using You-Tube and those who taught by using
conventional study. Meanwhile, in this research the researcher conducted a quasi-experimental researcher to
see the effects of using You-Tube for students’ speaking skill grade eleventh.

Mustikawati on her thesis state that the video technique significantly improves the students’ speaking
ability (2013). On her research about the effectiveness of YouTube, she found that score on post-test
experimental is 34.38% on category good and 65.63% on category average, meanwhile on post-test control
2.78% on category good and 97.22% on category average. Based on the explanation above, that can seen that
the post-test experimental group got higher score that post-test control group on category good.it means that
YouTube video is effectively improve speaking ability. According Yunita (2015) also states that You-Tube
is one of media that can improve students’ speaking skill.

Based on research finding in this research, it can be seen that there is any significant difference between
students who taught by using You-Tube and those who are not. Thus, it can be concluded that using You-
Tube can improve students’ speaking skill of grade ten at SMAN 1 Sarolangun academic year 2020/2021.

CONCLUSION
Based on the calculating result presented in the chapter IV, there are some conclusions which are can
be drawn as follow :
Based on the Table 4.9 The Output of Paired Sample t test, showed that the results of the compare analysis
with using t-test. The output showed of mean of pre-test (10.000), standard deviation (4.716), mean standard
error (1.144), the lower different (12.425), while the upper different (75.747). The result of t-test (8.741)
with df (16) and significance (0.000). It means as Table 4.10 showed, the p-value was less than 0.05
(0.000<0.05). It denotes that the outcome was significant. As a result, there was sufficient evidence to reject
Page 80
the null hypothesis, and it was found that the You-Tube Videos was beneficial in improving students'
speaking achievement. The output of the independent sample t-test showed that sig (2-tailed) is 0,000 and
was smaller than 0,05, as shown in the table above. It can be concluded from this data that there is a
significant difference between students who are taught using YouTube and those who are not. Although
there is improvement in control class but not more than experimental class. To sum up, the researcher found
that there was any difference significant effect of students’ speaking skill between students who were taught
by using You-Tube and students who were taught by using conventional technique at SMAN 1 Sarolangun.

REFERENCES
Arsyad, A. (2009). Media Pembelajaran. Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada
Bakri,Hasrul.(2011)retrievedfrom.(https://dokumen.tips/documents/jurnahasrulb kri.html)
Berk, R. A. (2009). Multimedia Teaching with Video Clip: Tv, YouTUbe, and Classroom.
http://www.sicet.org/journals/ijttl/issue0901/1_Berk.pdf. .
Blaz, Deborah. (2001). A Collection of Performance Tasks and Rubrics: Foreign Language. New York: On
Eye Education. Retrieved from. http://www.e-revistes.uji.es/languagevalue.Retrieve on September 7th
2011.
Brown, H. Douglas. (2000). Teaching by Principles. An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New
York: Longman. _______________(2001). Teaching by Principles.An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy (Second Edition). New York: Longman. _______________(2004). Language
Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. New York: Longman.
Brumfit, C. (2001). Individual Freedom in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Busà, M.G. (2010). “Sounding natural: improving oral presentation skills. Language Value”, 2011.
Brewster, Jean, Gail Ellis and Denis Girard.(2002). The Primary English Teacher’s Guide.2nd
Cakir, Ismail. (2006). “The Use of Video as an Audio-Visual Material inForeign Langue Teaching
Classroom”,edition. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
ComScore XMV, (2020). https://indonesia.googleblog.com/2020/09/lebih-dari-93-juta- penonton-dewasa-
di.html
Creswell, John W. (2014). Research Design, Qualitatives, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approcahes
(Fourth Edition). United State of America: Sage Publications.
Diki Riswandi (2016). Use of YouTube Video to Improve students' Speaking skill.
Goswami, U. (2011). A temporal sampling framework for developmental dyslexia. Trends in Cognitive
Sciences, 15, 3–10.

Newby, T., Stepich, D., Lehman, J., & Russell, J. (2000).Instructional technology for teaching and learning:
Designing instruction, integrating computers, and using media (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Prentice-
Hall.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. Digital Natives Digital Immigrants.

Page 81
Richards, J.C. &Renandya, W.A. (2002).Methodology in Language Teaching: an Anthology of Current
Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sarmah, Hazarika (2012). An Analysis Of Students' Interest in Mathematics in Relation to Gender of Students
and Type Of School,

Harmer, Jeremy. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching (Third Edition). London: Longman.
_______________(2007). The Practice of English Language Teaching (Fourth Edition). London:
Longman.

Lever-Duffy, Judy and Jean B. McDonald. (2008). Teaching and Learning with Technology Third Edition.
Boston: Pearson Education.
Wiersma, W &Jurs, SG. (2009). Research Methods in Education. 9thedition. Boston: Pearson Education.

Page 82